Search

Copyright of Geopolitica(s): Revista de Estudios Sobre Espacio y Poder is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper examines the position of the ‘interlocking network model’ for studying world-city networks in the context of an increasingly diverse literature on cities in globalization. The argument builds on the position that although world-city network analysis deals with a very specific process both functionally and temporally, it can nonetheless be interpreted as a particular example of a generic practice of inter-city relations. Conceptually, this is achieved through discussions about the notion of ‘central flow theory’ and the position of the model in quantitative research on city networks. Empirically, this achieved through a comparison of connectivities of cities created by producer services firms, non-governmental organizations, maritime-producer services firms and global media firms. These multiple analyses represent a decomposition of the current global expression of central flow theory, and examining parallels and differences between these networks allows the stress testing of the model’s more generic potential for assessing the increased salience of flows for cities across the world economy. Drawing on the observation that various cities are placed ‘on and off the map’ in relation to their specific interlocking to the world economy, we engage with two important critiques of the relevance of this research for understanding cities in globalization, i.e., the post-colonial critique formulated by Jennifer Robinson in 2002 and a denunciation for missing out the state by Göran Therborn in 2011. The paper concludes with a discussion of the ways in which our conceptual modelling and results might begin to be theoretically integrated into a wider theoretical framework centred on ‘central flow theory’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is widely accepted in international law that the responsibility of states for the breach of an obligation to prevent a given event occurs when that event takes place. When applied to the obligation to prevent genocide, it would mean that the breach of that obligation commences when genocide occurs. If that is the case, this would appear to be in conflict with the aim of the rules on the responsibility of states and the aim of the primary rule on the obligation to prevent genocide. This conflict has not been fully addressed in the literature. This contribution examines whether and to what extent under the existing rules of international law on the prevention of genocide it is possible to hold territorial states responsible for the breach of that obligation before genocide occurs or never occurs. It will be argued that international law does not provide a general rule which is applicable to all obligations to prevent and that the moment of the breach depends on the content and nature of each obligation and the event to be prevented. The nature and content of the obligation to prevent genocide dictates that its breach commences at the moment a state fails to do what that obligation requires it to do and not at the moment genocide is committed. The legal consequences of state responsibility for not taking measures to prevent genocide as well as the invocation of the responsibility are addressed, leading to the conclusion that an international mechanism seems to be required to effectively implement the responsibility of the territorial state to prevent genocide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal of Urban & Regional Research is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The role of cities in the transformation of society is discussed. The growing importance of cities and their global networks undermine the nation state. This is a reversal of the development of the modern state which, over several centuries, increased its control over its territory and cities. Such changes have generated renewed interest in the Middle Ages. The relations between Medieval cities and territorial states were part of complex and shifting political arrangements, involving urban networks and overlapping claims to authority over territories. The general characteristics of prospective neomedieval political systems are discussed in more detail and applied to the regulatory challenges faced by neoliberalism and the transformation to a circular economy. The shift in the focus of neoliberal policy from the competitiveness of cities to that of metropolitan regions, with diverging urban and provincial interests hampers neomedievalist coordination. The cooperation between urban and provincial interests can however be realised in the transformation from a linear to a more circular economy, where metropolitan regions are well suited to accommodate the diverging aspects and forms of territorial regulation in a neomedievalist manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]